Thursday, August 12, 2010

Yes I do but not with you.

I want to have dirty wrong demeaning sex. I also want to have just plain a lot of sex. I want to have sex with a lot of people. Sometimes I dress slutty. Sometimes I let people I don't know so well grope me or even fuck me. I am horny, slutty, kinky, and sometimes a little bit indiscriminate about it.

And none of this means I'm going to do it with you. "You" in the generic, that is. You unless otherwise specified. "You" as in a person who is aware of my existence, but has not received my consent.

Because I am asking for it. Just not from you. Check out my short skirt, my pushed-up tits, my giggle and my ass-wiggle--I'm gagging for it... but not from you. The fact that I'm out for sex does not imply that I'm out for sex with you.

Does this mean that you must never hit on me, that you have no chance at all? No! But it does mean that you can't see me across the room--or read my blog--and take me as some sort of given thing. There's a huge difference between approaching a woman with "hi, let's talk and see if we get along... baby" and approaching her with "welp, seems you're looking for a guy to fuck, and I am technically a guy, so let's get this over with." The second case has been happening a lot to me lately and they tend to take rejection poorly.

If they invented a short skirt that could only be seen by attractive, available, acceptable-smelling, personable, respectful dominant men and butch women (and appeared as baggy sweatpants to everyone else), I'd wear that. Until then, I'm stuck with omnidirectional short skirts, and all the "even though she doesn't know my name, she wore that for me" that seems to come with them.

12 comments:

I think that's a brilliant distinction that's often lost on people who complain about women who dress a certain way, as in, "why does she dress like that if she doesn't want the [disrespectful] attention?"

And then, people will often defend it with, "well, she's doing if for herself." Yes, that's possible, but it's also possible that she is doing it to attract people. But that doesn't mean that "You" are entitled to treat her as though she personally picked her outfit to be sexy for you personally, and that this is in some way implied consent. Hit on her in a nice way, sure, but even if a girl dresses to increase the chances of attracting a guy she is also attracted to, it doesn't mean that you are allowed to be an asshole to her. Yeah, she might reject you, even when she's wearing a sexy outfit. Get over it.

The second case has been happening a lot to me lately and they tend to take rejection poorly.

Sorry to hear that, though it's been hinted at before. The whole "not with you" thing obviously needs to be said, especially as some of them are apparently actually blog readers, and I think it was said as nicely as possible while having a chance of being effective.

You are going to be encountering a different set of guys projecting that way, and it's worth keeping in mind that they are non-representative of guys in general. It separates guys in two ways, both of which are what you want: It attracts guys who want sex from you in the short term and are thinking about it right now. And it filters guys who don't. If I just want conversation, I'm not talking to you because I see you want something else; you're probably also going to filter some of the guys who are thinking long-term. Not implying that you want to change that, your time isn't wasted that way; but just remember that the encounters you get don't represent "men".

As the local whipping boy for this particular argument, I should probably avoid commenting on what role the clothes play, but I have to underscore this important caveat: Does this mean that you must never hit on me, that you have no chance at all? No!

The worst thing is when an unwanted guy starts hitting on you (impersonal 'you,' because I really mean me back when I was single) and won't take the hint that you want them to go away, thus cockblocking you and preventing you from hitting on the guys you *do* want. All standing around, like "so, where are you from? So, what do you do?" SO ANNOYING.

Mousie - I don't really care about getting a fair image of men (and I kind of resent any "you wanna get treated like a lady, act like a lady" implications there)--I just want to stop people thinking that because I'm open to sex I must necessarily be open to sex with anyone who asks.

Sarah - I get my subscription copy of Cosmo a few days after it hits newsstands, and the wait is agonizing.

Emily H. - The "so where are you from?" non-hitting-on is something I have trouble dealing with. Because on the one hand, at least it's nonthreatening; on the other hand, it puts you in the awkward situation of saying "I don't want to fuck you, and I want to fuck someone, so I just don't have time to make pseudo-innocent chitchat all night." I still haven't found a totally polite way out of that one--of course there's always "welp, it was nice talking to you, I'm gonna go mingle," and "I see my friend over there," but sometimes they follow you, and fuck can you do about that.

No implication of "you wanna get treated like a lady, act like a lady" intended. And obviously you're not engaging in an impromptu survey of men's behavior.

My actual controversial implication isn't "act like a lady", it's that I believe that in qualities such as being personable and respectful, the bell curve of the guys you encounter is going to be pulled significantly downwards. Of course as with any bell curve, many of them will exceed the unfiltered average in a large enough sample. I'm not saying guys who are looking for sex in the short term are bad guys, I don't think I was at that point in my life either, but I am saying that they have a lot of bad company.

You know how decent guys complain that it's hard to meet a girl because so many of the previous guys she met were assholes? I don't think that's because the world male general population is mostly assholes.

Not that this is necessarily what you were saying, but there are just as many skeevy assholes looking for a long-term relationship as there are skeevy assholes looking for a quick fuck. In general, actually, I've been treated much more disrespectfully by guys who were (or wanted to be) my boyfriend than by guys I was just hooking up with for the night.

aebhel - Really? Hunh. I was saying exactly that. I thought, based on my own male acquaintances, that the skeevy asshole proportion was noticeably skewed towards the quick fuck crowd and away from the long-term crowd.

Does this mean that you must never hit on me, that you have no chance at all? No!On the contrary, I think, in your case at least it means do hit on you ... but do so by hitting on you, i.e., making a sincere effort to build attraction or desire. Hit on you in the spirit of "you have succeeded in attracting me, and now I will determine if this is or can be reciprocated," not in the spirit of "I am answering the CQ you are clearly sending out."

On the whom it's for thing: I have requested my girlfriend wear specific outfits on special occasions*, and she does so, and I can't be the only person who finds that look appealing -- but I am the primary person intended to find it appealing.

*Including the special occasion known as "the day you wear that skirt"